Is it though? Is that why the railroads and Bell had > to be broken up by the government? Because fighting > them through free-market pressures was working so well?
I'm sure that with a moment's reflection you'll remember that Bell was a creation of the Federal Government and their monopoly was the result of a bargain that the feds made early on--that Bell would wire every (or nearly) every community in exchange for a government guaranteed monopoly. In exchange they were only allowed to charge cost + $SOME percentage (which is why they built some AWESOME switching systems in nuclear hardened buildings) and were supposed to charge every person the same rate, but could charge businesses more.
The lawsuit that started down the road to the breakup was filed by MCI, another private company, that AT&T (Bell) was preventing from making local interconnects.
The Railroads were a similar story--the USG helped certain railroads grow by using Eminent Domain, and then taking action when it was politically more expedient.
This is a common thread that runs through most "monopoly" cases. Microsoft isn't that much less of a monopoly today than it was 20 years ago, but today they have lobbyists, and Gates gives money to left wing charities, so they get a pass (well, that and everyone's focus is on smartphones and tablets where MS is getting their asses kicked. And where Goggle, who lurves them some big government connections, is massively dominant).
The one problem with assuming that Government will protect you from the big bad market is that WHO IS PROTECTING YOU FROM THE GOVERNMENT? Look at this last election where you had two horribly corrupt people at the top of the ticket (let's set aside which one was worse, both are massively corrupt) and two loons at the bottom (one arrested on a felony charge during the campaign).
The market IS in fact self-correcting if you can keep government far enough away. Many times it is the government (at the local, state or federal level) that either grant monopolies (look at Cable companies--they were mostly granted city/regional monopolies in the 70s and 80s, and then got conglomerated into a couple of big companies later.
Local, state and federal governments, usually at the behest of lobbyists, also raise barriers to competition (barriers to entry).
...all rely on US-made equipment like those from Blue Coat or McAfee's SmartFilter software.
The hardware might be designed in the US, and certain more technical parts of the OS (IIRC Bluecoat is owned by sidewinder, and last time I ran one Sidewinder was running on top of BSDI) and filtering layers might be written in the US, but most of the hardware is built and assembled in China, and large bits of the application layer are (probably) written in India.
Not that this changes things much--other than "we" have found counterfeit cisco gear running hacked IOS (the original IOS, not this Johnny come lately on your cellphone), so it's not impossible that some of these dirtball regiemes are buying either QA rejects or "second shift" hardware.
There are a bunch of websites where you can download various certification tests from "for practice".
In effect these places offer you "the test" so you can avoid the hard work of studying and *learning* the material, and instead just memorize the specific answers needed to pass.
What this clause is meant to do is to tell you that *reproducing* the test is copyrighted and that by memorizing the questions and writing them out afterwards for distribution, you are violating the law.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Dude should have given the monkey a banana
Dude should have given the monkey a banana, then asserted that the photograohs were covered under "work for hire".
Made in the US? I doubt it.
The hardware might be designed in the US, and certain more technical parts of the OS (IIRC Bluecoat is owned by sidewinder, and last time I ran one Sidewinder was running on top of BSDI) and filtering layers might be written in the US, but most of the hardware is built and assembled in China, and large bits of the application layer are (probably) written in India.
Not that this changes things much--other than "we" have found counterfeit cisco gear running hacked IOS (the original IOS, not this Johnny come lately on your cellphone), so it's not impossible that some of these dirtball regiemes are buying either QA rejects or "second shift" hardware.
You're missing what they're trying to prevent.
There are a bunch of websites where you can download various certification tests from "for practice".
In effect these places offer you "the test" so you can avoid the hard work of studying and *learning* the material, and instead just memorize the specific answers needed to pass.
What this clause is meant to do is to tell you that *reproducing* the test is copyrighted and that by memorizing the questions and writing them out afterwards for distribution, you are violating the law.
Re: Re: Few tools to monitor their staffs?
No, you spelled it right the first time.